My sister is equally proud of the fact.that she's never voted. After all, she says, they're all crooks.
Well, perhaps it may seem like Hobson's Choice -- pick the crook or don't -- but there's a little more to it than that. At worst, it's more a matter of degree. Would you rather be attacked by 50 duck-sized horses, or 50 horse-sized ducks? Most people seem to have an opinion on that one!
So even if the choice isn't between two (or more) of the most qualified candidates for the position, there's still real choice. When it comes to crooks, do you prefer the bank robber or the shoplifter? "None of the above," isn't an option, so which do you prefer?
When you choose not to vote at all, you're really saying "I'll let someone else decide." Unlike organizations that use Robert's Rules of Order, there are no quorums in our elections. If only three out of 3,000 registered voters show up to vote, then majority rules, and a candidate is elected. (If only two people show up to vote, then there might need to be a run-off, ) If only one shows up, then it's a landslide.
You're non-participation doesn't keep the crooks out. If you think that there are only crooks on the ballot, then know that at least one will get it. "No" isn't an option -- only the choice between the lesser of two evils. So if you feel you really at all the candidates are crooks, then I encourage you to chose that lesser evil by voting.
Because if you don't, then I get to decide. And I may have a different opinion than you.